Reading mode: Light Dark

DC290--Disappointment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter js
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
J

js

Guest
Just received my DC290. I have to say I'm disappointed.

My first foray into digital photography was Kodak's DC210 plus.
It was a great camera; small, relatively fast, easy to use,
great pictures. $400.
Gripes? Fixed focus. And no "slow shutter" warning, which results
in occasionally blurry photographs.

But the DC290 gives me the feeling that I just payed $400 more
to get a 410 saddled with a slower OS. My main disappointment?
No shutter nor aperature priority. On a camera in this price
range? Unbelievable. And I still haven't found mention of a slow
shutter-speed warning.

I had hoped that the Digita scripting would somehow provide a
work-around to support shutter/aperature priority, but this
quaint hope seems to be dying fast. Not to mention the contortions
that one must go through to get Digita scripting information from
Kodak. Join this "club", provide this personal information, supply your
mailing address, fill out this survey, etc. What next Kodak? Dental
records for tech support?

The 4 Alkaline/4NiMH + charger included was a good move. An AC adapter
would have been appreciated ( considering I have a NiMH and
charger from the last camera, but the AC adapter was sold with the 210)
I'm disappointed that no carrying case was included...even a chincy one.
Oh well.

So far, the only advantages I can find over the 410 are:
  • Higher resolution
  • Burst exposures
  • Adjustable focus ( With the speed of the focus, I'm still debating the merit
of this one )
  • Ability to turn off the camera while it's still processing
Shortcomings, compared to the 410
  • Extremely limited macro support
  • Cheap-feeling mode selector switch. ( Also, why is a whole position on the switch
dedicated to software version info? Shouldn't this be buried in a sub-menu somewhere?
  • A sustantially lighter wallet.
I had narrowed my camera choices down to the Nikon Coolpix950 and the DC290.
I chose the '290 based on Askey's reviews ( and others ) that indicate that the
290 still had the best image quality. I'll stick by that part of my purchasing

decision for the time being. But the second I'm convinced that Nikon has solved

the minor image quality issues pointed out by Phil ( Great reviews, Phil! please keep
'em coming) and others, I'm outta this Kodak camp.

Growing up a professional photographer's son, I had a great loyalty to Koday, but Nikon

seems to be more in touch the "prosumer's" desire for advanced features without the

$5000 DCS Pro price tag. I can understand no shutter/aperature priority in a $400 "consumer" model, but in a $800 "prosumer" version? I'm moving over to Nikon
for my next camera.

My advice to Kodak: Keep the great picture quality, drop the scripting toys for now
and work on speed and "advanced" photo features.

For now, I'm gonna try to quit harping on this glaring shortcoming and give the camera

a chance. I'm gonna shoot with it a while and see if I still feel let down. Who knows?

The '290 may yet suprise me. But my longing for a great "prosumer" camera just has not
been satisfied.

js
 
Having owned the Dc280 for a week, I shared the same complaints as you. The Dc280's images are not as sharp as other cams, and the 2x (60mm!) zoom really stinks. I promptly returned the camera, and exchanged for a Canon S10. The Canon so far seems to be a highly capable little camera. The image quality is awesome, and focussing is very good. And, the USB is lightening fast, faster than Kodak's. The Kodak pauses between different pictures. The Canon just keeps downloading. Extremely fast!!!
 
Hi,
Daniel said:
Having owned the Dc280 for a week, I shared the same complaints as you.
The Dc280's images are not as sharp as other cams, and the 2x (60mm!)
zoom really stinks. I promptly returned the camera, and exchanged for a
Click to expand...
The DC290 has a built-in sharpening module that is user-selectable. See my sample photos at http://come.to/my_album to see the difference sharpening settings.
Member said:
Canon S10. The Canon so far seems to be a highly capable little camera.
The image quality is awesome, and focussing is very good. And, the USB
is lightening fast, faster than Kodak's. The Kodak pauses between
different pictures. The Canon just keeps downloading. Extremely fast!!!
Click to expand...
How can that be? The USB specs are the same - unless Canon got hold of the new USB standard (not yet released) and implemented it already. Seriously, have you considered checking the file sizes that you are downloading before you made the comparison?

Cheers!
 
Yes, the Canon's USB is truly faster than the Kodak. Even if two cameras use the same technology, one of them is certainly going to have a better implementation. In the case of S10, Canon seems to put together the technology extremely well. The USB is truly fast!!! The Kodak is fast, but, as I said, the camera pauses for a while between pictures (about 4 to 5 seconds). This slows down the whole downloading process.
R Feria said:
Daniel said:
Having owned the Dc280 for a week, I shared the same complaints as you.
The Dc280's images are not as sharp as other cams, and the 2x (60mm!)
zoom really stinks. I promptly returned the camera, and exchanged for a
Click to expand...
The DC290 has a built-in sharpening module that is user-selectable. See
my sample photos at http://come.to/my_album to see the difference
sharpening settings.
Member said:
Canon S10. The Canon so far seems to be a highly capable little camera.
The image quality is awesome, and focussing is very good. And, the USB
is lightening fast, faster than Kodak's. The Kodak pauses between
different pictures. The Canon just keeps downloading. Extremely fast!!!
Click to expand...
How can that be? The USB specs are the same - unless Canon got hold of
the new USB standard (not yet released) and implemented it already.
Seriously, have you considered checking the file sizes that you are
downloading before you made the comparison?

Cheers!
Click to expand...
 
damn man....that sounded like one of my high school english papers...with all those well placed SAT words...heheh...

later.
js said:
Just received my DC290. I have to say I'm disappointed.

My first foray into digital photography was Kodak's DC210 plus.
It was a great camera; small, relatively fast, easy to use,
great pictures. $400.
Gripes? Fixed focus. And no "slow shutter" warning, which results
in occasionally blurry photographs.

But the DC290 gives me the feeling that I just payed $400 more
to get a 410 saddled with a slower OS. My main disappointment?
No shutter nor aperature priority. On a camera in this price
range? Unbelievable. And I still haven't found mention of a slow
shutter-speed warning.

I had hoped that the Digita scripting would somehow provide a
work-around to support shutter/aperature priority, but this
quaint hope seems to be dying fast. Not to mention the contortions
that one must go through to get Digita scripting information from
Kodak. Join this "club", provide this personal information, supply your
mailing address, fill out this survey, etc. What next Kodak? Dental
records for tech support?

The 4 Alkaline/4NiMH + charger included was a good move. An AC adapter
would have been appreciated ( considering I have a NiMH and
charger from the last camera, but the AC adapter was sold with the 210)
I'm disappointed that no carrying case was included...even a chincy one.
Oh well.

So far, the only advantages I can find over the 410 are:
  • Higher resolution
  • Burst exposures
  • Adjustable focus ( With the speed of the focus, I'm still debating the
merit
of this one )
  • Ability to turn off the camera while it's still processing
Shortcomings, compared to the 410
  • Extremely limited macro support
  • Cheap-feeling mode selector switch. ( Also, why is a whole position on
the switch
dedicated to software version info? Shouldn't this be buried in a
sub-menu somewhere?
  • A sustantially lighter wallet.
I had narrowed my camera choices down to the Nikon Coolpix950 and the DC290.
I chose the '290 based on Askey's reviews ( and others ) that indicate
that the
290 still had the best image quality. I'll stick by that part of my
purchasing
decision for the time being. But the second I'm convinced that Nikon
has solved
the minor image quality issues pointed out by Phil ( Great reviews, Phil!
please keep
'em coming) and others, I'm outta this Kodak camp.

Growing up a professional photographer's son, I had a great loyalty to
Koday, but Nikon
seems to be more in touch the "prosumer's" desire for advanced features
without the
$5000 DCS Pro price tag. I can understand no shutter/aperature priority
in a $400 "consumer" model, but in a $800 "prosumer" version? I'm moving
over to Nikon
for my next camera.

My advice to Kodak: Keep the great picture quality, drop the scripting
toys for now
and work on speed and "advanced" photo features.

For now, I'm gonna try to quit harping on this glaring shortcoming and
give the camera
a chance. I'm gonna shoot with it a while and see if I still feel let
down. Who knows?
The '290 may yet suprise me. But my longing for a great "prosumer"
camera just has not
been satisfied.

js
Click to expand...
 
js said:
Just received my DC290. I have to say I'm disappointed.

My first foray into digital photography was Kodak's DC210 plus.
It was a great camera; small, relatively fast, easy to use,
great pictures. $400.
Gripes? Fixed focus. And no "slow shutter" warning, which results
in occasionally blurry photographs.

But the DC290 gives me the feeling that I just payed $400 more
to get a 410 saddled with a slower OS. My main disappointment?
No shutter nor aperature priority. On a camera in this price
range? Unbelievable. And I still haven't found mention of a slow
shutter-speed warning.

I had hoped that the Digita scripting would somehow provide a
work-around to support shutter/aperature priority, but this
quaint hope seems to be dying fast. Not to mention the contortions
that one must go through to get Digita scripting information from
Kodak. Join this "club", provide this personal information, supply your
mailing address, fill out this survey, etc. What next Kodak? Dental
records for tech support?

The 4 Alkaline/4NiMH + charger included was a good move. An AC adapter
would have been appreciated ( considering I have a NiMH and
charger from the last camera, but the AC adapter was sold with the 210)
I'm disappointed that no carrying case was included...even a chincy one.
Oh well.

So far, the only advantages I can find over the 410 are:
  • Higher resolution
  • Burst exposures
  • Adjustable focus ( With the speed of the focus, I'm still debating the
merit
of this one )
  • Ability to turn off the camera while it's still processing
Shortcomings, compared to the 410
  • Extremely limited macro support
  • Cheap-feeling mode selector switch. ( Also, why is a whole position on
the switch
dedicated to software version info? Shouldn't this be buried in a
sub-menu somewhere?
  • A sustantially lighter wallet.
I had narrowed my camera choices down to the Nikon Coolpix950 and the DC290.
I chose the '290 based on Askey's reviews ( and others ) that indicate
that the
290 still had the best image quality. I'll stick by that part of my
purchasing
decision for the time being. But the second I'm convinced that Nikon
has solved
the minor image quality issues pointed out by Phil ( Great reviews, Phil!
please keep
'em coming) and others, I'm outta this Kodak camp.

Growing up a professional photographer's son, I had a great loyalty to
Koday, but Nikon
seems to be more in touch the "prosumer's" desire for advanced features
without the
$5000 DCS Pro price tag. I can understand no shutter/aperature priority
in a $400 "consumer" model, but in a $800 "prosumer" version? I'm moving
over to Nikon
for my next camera.

My advice to Kodak: Keep the great picture quality, drop the scripting
toys for now
and work on speed and "advanced" photo features.

For now, I'm gonna try to quit harping on this glaring shortcoming and
give the camera
a chance. I'm gonna shoot with it a while and see if I still feel let
down. Who knows?
The '290 may yet suprise me. But my longing for a great "prosumer"
camera just has not
been satisfied.

js
Click to expand...
Unfortunatly I totally agree with the dissapointment in the DC-290. Colors were well saturated that is it (although teal looks like aqua and so does the sky). I have a 950 now and I shoot with contrast O+ and am blown away by the results Nikon is far sharper and it even feels like a camera!
 
js said:
Just received my DC290. I have to say I'm disappointed.

My first foray into digital photography was Kodak's DC210 plus.
It was a great camera; small, relatively fast, easy to use,
great pictures. $400.
Gripes? Fixed focus. And no "slow shutter" warning, which results
in occasionally blurry photographs.

But the DC290 gives me the feeling that I just payed $400 more
to get a 410 saddled with a slower OS. My main disappointment?
No shutter nor aperature priority. On a camera in this price
range? Unbelievable. And I still haven't found mention of a slow
shutter-speed warning.

I had hoped that the Digita scripting would somehow provide a
work-around to support shutter/aperature priority, but this
quaint hope seems to be dying fast. Not to mention the contortions
that one must go through to get Digita scripting information from
Kodak. Join this "club", provide this personal information, supply your
mailing address, fill out this survey, etc. What next Kodak? Dental
records for tech support?

The 4 Alkaline/4NiMH + charger included was a good move. An AC adapter
would have been appreciated ( considering I have a NiMH and
charger from the last camera, but the AC adapter was sold with the 210)
I'm disappointed that no carrying case was included...even a chincy one.
Oh well.

So far, the only advantages I can find over the 410 are:
  • Higher resolution
  • Burst exposures
  • Adjustable focus ( With the speed of the focus, I'm still debating the
merit
of this one )
  • Ability to turn off the camera while it's still processing
Shortcomings, compared to the 410
  • Extremely limited macro support
  • Cheap-feeling mode selector switch. ( Also, why is a whole position on
the switch
dedicated to software version info? Shouldn't this be buried in a
sub-menu somewhere?
  • A sustantially lighter wallet.
I had narrowed my camera choices down to the Nikon Coolpix950 and the DC290.
I chose the '290 based on Askey's reviews ( and others ) that indicate
that the
290 still had the best image quality. I'll stick by that part of my
purchasing
decision for the time being. But the second I'm convinced that Nikon
has solved
the minor image quality issues pointed out by Phil ( Great reviews, Phil!
please keep
'em coming) and others, I'm outta this Kodak camp.

Growing up a professional photographer's son, I had a great loyalty to
Koday, but Nikon
seems to be more in touch the "prosumer's" desire for advanced features
without the
$5000 DCS Pro price tag. I can understand no shutter/aperature priority
in a $400 "consumer" model, but in a $800 "prosumer" version? I'm moving
over to Nikon
for my next camera.

My advice to Kodak: Keep the great picture quality, drop the scripting
toys for now
and work on speed and "advanced" photo features.

For now, I'm gonna try to quit harping on this glaring shortcoming and
give the camera
a chance. I'm gonna shoot with it a while and see if I still feel let
down. Who knows?
The '290 may yet suprise me. But my longing for a great "prosumer"
camera just has not
been satisfied.

js
Click to expand...
Dear JS,

Please can you direct me to any of the 290 "reviews" you speak of. The only one I am aware of is steve's first look review. Thanks... doc
 
Hi JS,
js said:
Just received my DC290. I have to say I'm disappointed.
Click to expand...
Sorry to hear that. You are the first one I have heard who's disappointed with the camera.
Member said:
But the DC290 gives me the feeling that I just payed $400 more
to get a 410 saddled with a slower OS. My main disappointment?
No shutter nor aperature priority. On a camera in this price
range? Unbelievable. And I still haven't found mention of a slow
shutter-speed warning.
Click to expand...
Shutter priority? Yes, there is none - unless you want to set it to Long Time Exposure - then you'd get from 1/2 to 16 without scripts.

Aperture Priority? You can set the F values on the menu.
Member said:
I had hoped that the Digita scripting would somehow provide a
work-around to support shutter/aperature priority, but this
quaint hope seems to be dying fast. Not to mention the contortions
that one must go through to get Digita scripting information from
Kodak. Join this "club", provide this personal information, supply your
mailing address, fill out this survey, etc. What next Kodak? Dental
records for tech support?
Click to expand...
Sad to hear this but you seem to have missed FlashPoint, the creator of Digita, as well as digitacamera.com - where you get a lot of information, scripts and apps.
Member said:
The 4 Alkaline/4NiMH + charger included was a good move. An AC adapter
would have been appreciated ( considering I have a NiMH and
charger from the last camera, but the AC adapter was sold with the 210)
I'm disappointed that no carrying case was included...even a chincy one.
Oh well.
Click to expand...
Well, you can't win them all. The AC adapter was not included maybe because the camera is expected to be used away from a power outlet.
Member said:
So far, the only advantages I can find over the 410 are:
  • Higher resolution
  • Burst exposures
  • Adjustable focus ( With the speed of the focus, I'm still debating the
merit
of this one )
  • Ability to turn off the camera while it's still processing
Click to expand...
You have not considered the power of Digita plus all other features such as remote shutter release capability, exposure lock, in-camera sharpness settings, etc.
Member said:
Shortcomings, compared to the 410
  • Extremely limited macro support
Click to expand...
True but this can be addressed by using lens adapters.
Member said:
  • Cheap-feeling mode selector switch. ( Also, why is a whole position on
the switch
dedicated to software version info? Shouldn't this be buried in a
sub-menu somewhere?
  • A sustantially lighter wallet.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on this.
Member said:
I had narrowed my camera choices down to the Nikon Coolpix950 and the DC290.
I chose the '290 based on Askey's reviews ( and others ) that indicate
that the
290 still had the best image quality. I'll stick by that part of my
purchasing
decision for the time being. But the second I'm convinced that Nikon
has solved
the minor image quality issues pointed out by Phil ( Great reviews, Phil!
please keep
'em coming) and others, I'm outta this Kodak camp.
Click to expand...
Hope not. Well, in any case, it is your decision anyway - to each his own. =)
Member said:
Growing up a professional photographer's son, I had a great loyalty to
Koday, but Nikon
seems to be more in touch the "prosumer's" desire for advanced features
without the
$5000 DCS Pro price tag. I can understand no shutter/aperature priority
in a $400 "consumer" model, but in a $800 "prosumer" version? I'm moving
over to Nikon
for my next camera.
Click to expand...
Sad to hear that...
Member said:
My advice to Kodak: Keep the great picture quality, drop the scripting
toys for now
and work on speed and "advanced" photo features.
Click to expand...
I disagree with you on this. My suggestion is to keep the scripting and work on speed and other photo features as well.
Member said:
For now, I'm gonna try to quit harping on this glaring shortcoming and
give the camera
a chance. I'm gonna shoot with it a while and see if I still feel let
down. Who knows?
The '290 may yet suprise me. But my longing for a great "prosumer"
camera just has not
been satisfied.
Click to expand...
I invite you to join the kodak-digita-camera list at egroups and talk to pro photographers using the DC260/265/290 for their photo shoots.

Cheers!
 
I think Kodak's designers simply didn't care about speed, so at each point in the process of product design, they were willing to sacrifice it for some other value. The final result is a camera that is really good as long as speed isn't an issue.

Maybe that comes from their hundred years' experience with film? With conventional photography, all you can improve is the technical handling of light and exposed film. Companies (I'm thinking of Toshiba now, which made the PDR-M4 I'm so happy with) which never dealt with film, but came to this market through computers and consumer electronics think of speed as the first consideration, and image-quality as just one value among several that need to be traded off.

Anyway, I'm another departing Kodak former-enthusiast.

-mark grebner
 
Hi Daniel,
Daniel said:
Yes, the Canon's USB is truly faster than the Kodak. Even if two cameras
use the same technology, one of them is certainly going to have a better
implementation. In the case of S10, Canon seems to put together the
technology extremely well. The USB is truly fast!!! The Kodak is fast,
but, as I said, the camera pauses for a while between pictures (about 4
to 5 seconds). This slows down the whole downloading process.
Click to expand...
I think the DigitaOS contributes to this in a way - considering how much overhead it introduces - there is always a tradeoff in performance with the added features.

Cheers!
 
Hi Mark,
Mark Grebner said:
I think Kodak's designers simply didn't care about speed, so at each
point in the process of product design, they were willing to sacrifice it
for some other value. The final result is a camera that is really good
as long as speed isn't an issue.

Maybe that comes from their hundred years' experience with film? With
conventional photography, all you can improve is the technical handling
of light and exposed film. Companies (I'm thinking of Toshiba now, which
made the PDR-M4 I'm so happy with) which never dealt with film, but came
to this market through computers and consumer electronics think of speed
as the first consideration, and image-quality as just one value among
several that need to be traded off.

Anyway, I'm another departing Kodak former-enthusiast.
Click to expand...
As I have pointed out earlier, Kodak had speed in mind as well as adding more features to the camera. In much as the Toshiba takes photos very quickly, the added features of the Kodak cannot be beat with that of speed alone. The Kodak speed is sufficient, I must say, to go head on with the PDR-M4/5 considering its Burst Mode of 5-20 photos at frame rates of 2 to 3 frames per second. Whilst the M4/M5 can take 4 photos in two seconds, the DC290 can take 5. However, the 290 DigitaOS introduces a significant delay in the processing of the photos compared to the Toshiba's turn-around time of 2 seconds, as you have pointed out in your earlier message. Speed wise, Toshiba still rules but for speed + features, Kodak's DC290 has an edge. =)

Cheers!
 
js said:
Just received my DC290. I have to say I'm disappointed.

My first foray into digital photography was Kodak's DC210 plus.
It was a great camera; small, relatively fast, easy to use,
great pictures. $400.
Gripes? Fixed focus. And no "slow shutter" warning, which results
in occasionally blurry photographs.

But the DC290 gives me the feeling that I just payed $400 more
to get a 410 saddled with a slower OS. My main disappointment?
No shutter nor aperature priority. On a camera in this price
range? Unbelievable. And I still haven't found mention of a slow
shutter-speed warning.

I had hoped that the Digita scripting would somehow provide a
work-around to support shutter/aperature priority, but this
quaint hope seems to be dying fast. Not to mention the contortions
that one must go through to get Digita scripting information from
Kodak. Join this "club", provide this personal information, supply your
mailing address, fill out this survey, etc. What next Kodak? Dental
records for tech support?

The 4 Alkaline/4NiMH + charger included was a good move. An AC adapter
would have been appreciated ( considering I have a NiMH and
charger from the last camera, but the AC adapter was sold with the 210)
I'm disappointed that no carrying case was included...even a chincy one.
Oh well.

So far, the only advantages I can find over the 410 are:
  • Higher resolution
  • Burst exposures
  • Adjustable focus ( With the speed of the focus, I'm still debating the
merit
of this one )
  • Ability to turn off the camera while it's still processing
Shortcomings, compared to the 410
  • Extremely limited macro support
  • Cheap-feeling mode selector switch. ( Also, why is a whole position on
the switch
dedicated to software version info? Shouldn't this be buried in a
sub-menu somewhere?
  • A sustantially lighter wallet.
I had narrowed my camera choices down to the Nikon Coolpix950 and the DC290.
I chose the '290 based on Askey's reviews ( and others ) that indicate
that the
290 still had the best image quality. I'll stick by that part of my
purchasing
decision for the time being. But the second I'm convinced that Nikon
has solved
the minor image quality issues pointed out by Phil ( Great reviews, Phil!
please keep
'em coming) and others, I'm outta this Kodak camp.

Growing up a professional photographer's son, I had a great loyalty to
Koday, but Nikon
seems to be more in touch the "prosumer's" desire for advanced features
without the
$5000 DCS Pro price tag. I can understand no shutter/aperature priority
in a $400 "consumer" model, but in a $800 "prosumer" version? I'm moving
over to Nikon
for my next camera.

My advice to Kodak: Keep the great picture quality, drop the scripting
toys for now
and work on speed and "advanced" photo features.

For now, I'm gonna try to quit harping on this glaring shortcoming and
give the camera
a chance. I'm gonna shoot with it a while and see if I still feel let
down. Who knows?
The '290 may yet suprise me. But my longing for a great "prosumer"
camera just has not
been satisfied.

js
Click to expand...
Kodak has better colour though other features may not be in par with say Nikon etc. I've Nikon 950 and DC260, I am not satisfy with the colour of 950, I am not satisfy with the speed & lens quality of 260. Can I get the best from both of them, time will see. Are you sure Nikon have improved the colour of 950, I hope so, I am waiting for that good news. When I shoot people, I use kodak, when I shoot sport, scenery and macro, I use 950.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top